Russell Phillips's Blog, page 6

Remembrance Day 2018

I choose to wear a red poppy. Some wear a white one, others choose to wear nothing. I have no argument with any of those people.

I save my anger for those that think it is acceptable to send teenagers to die.

I direct my anger at those that demand war, then ask why our soldiers are dying.

I remember all those that die in war, but most of all, I hope that one day society will accept that war is as unacceptable as slavery and child labour.

New Song About Lidice

I’ve just discovered that the band Hats Off Gentlemen It’s Adequate have included a song about Lidice on their new album, Out of Mind. I was both surprised and very proud when one of the band, Malcolm Galloway, contacted me to tell me that the song was inspired by my interview on The WW2 Podcast and my book, A Ray of Light.

You can listen to the song here or on Bandcamp, and I’ve reproduced (with permission) the lyrics below.

Out Of Mind by Hats Off Gentlemen It's Adequate

Lidice: Lyrics

They wanted you to disappear

From history

From memory

Wiped away

You mustn’t be forgotten

You mustn’t be forgotten

The lamplight

Rising from the coalface

Shines across the ocean

Light for the forgotten

One village to another

Our brothers underground

We heard you cry

Never forget, remember Lidice

We weren’t there with you

When you died

But we now stand, side by side

Remember Lidice

They wanted you to disappear

from history, from memory,

Never forget

The lamplight

Rising from the coalface

Shines across the ocean

Light for the forgotten

One village to another

Our brothers underground

We heard you cry, never forget

Remember Lidice

We weren’t there with you

When you died

But we now stand, side by side

Remember Lidice

They wanted you to disappear, from history, from memory

And they failed

Remember Lidice, remember Lidice, never forget

Weapons and Equipment of the Warsaw Pact – Ebook box set now available

I’m happy to announce that I’ve just released an ebook of the first three books in the Weapons and Equipment of the Warsaw Pact series. If you haven’t already bought the ebooks, this will give you the chance to get all three in a single file at a reduced price.

It is available at all the major ebook vendors. Buy it now.

The Swedish Strv 103 (S-Tank)

Development of the Stridsvagn 103 began in 1958, led by Bofors. A contract was awarded in 1959 for two prototypes, followed by a pre-production order from the Swedish army for 10 vehicles in mid 1960.

Strv 103 (Jorchr, via Wikimedia Commons [CC BY-SA])

The initial two prototypes were finished in 1961, and differed from production vehicles. They had no return rollers, no support for the main gun, and five machine guns. One machine gun was fitted on the commander’s cupola, plus two pairs in boxes on either side of the hull, firing forwards. These prototypes were powered by a Boeing gas turbine and a Rolls-Royce petrol engine.

The pre-production vehicles replaced the right-hand pair of machine guns with a single 12.7mm ranging machine gun. Two return rollers were added to each track, and the petrol engine was replaced with a Rolls-Royce K60 multi-fuel engine.

The first production vehicles were finished in 1966. These did not have a flotation screen or dozer blade. Both of these enhancements were included on later production vehicles, which were designated Strv 103B. They were retro-fitted to existing vehicles to bring them up to the Strv 103B standard. Production continued until 1971, by which time 300 vehicles had been built.

Description

The hull was of welded construction. The engine and transmission were at the front, reducing the chance of crew casualties from shots that penetrated the frontal armour. The fighting compartment was in the centre, with the ammunition at the rear.

The glacis plate had horizontal ribs that were intended to deflect armour piercing shells, and in time of war, an extra armour array was to be fitted to the front of the vehicle. This consisted of a series of vertical bars that would prematurely detonate HEAT rounds, and could also degrade the effectiveness of some types of kinetic energy shells. Damaged bars could be quickly replaced. The existence of this armour was kept secret until 1992, although it had existed for many years before then.

Strv 103C, showing the extra bar armour (Mats Persson, via Wikimedia Commons [CC BY-SA])

The two engines were linked to a single output, so that either can be used at any time. Normal procedure was to use the multi-fuel engine, with the gas turbine used when in action. The gas turbine could also be used to assist with cold weather starting and to provide power when the multi-fuel engine was not in use.

The driver sat on the left, and also operated the main armament. The radio operator was seated behind the driver, and had a set of driving controls to drive the vehicle backwards. The commander sat on the right of the vehicle, and was provided with a stabilised sight. He could aim and fire the main armament from his position.

Main armament was a 105mm rifled gun. Designated the L74, it was 62 calibres long, and effectively a longer version of the British L7. An autoloader was used to load the gun from a magazine of 50 rounds. Typically, an Strv 103 would carry 25 APDS (later APFSDS), 20 HE, and five smoke, but any combination was possible. Rate of fire was 15 rounds per minute, with empty cartridge cases automatically ejected out of the hull. In the event that the autoloader failed, the radio operator could hand-crank the loading mechanism. The gun was securely clamped to the hull, and was aimed by turning the entire vehicle, with elevation controlled by adjusting the suspension. This was done automatically as the driver or commander adjusted their aim. The suspension was locked before firing to increase stability.

Secondary armament consisted of three 7.62mm Ksp 58 machine guns. Two of these were mounted in the front of the hull, on the left. The third was mounted on the left of the commander’s cupola. Aimed and fired from within the vehicle, this could be used for anti-air defence.

Strv 103s were not fitted with NBC protection, although it was prepared for one. The only night vision aids were infra-red driving lights. They were fitted with a flotation screen, which took 15-20 minutes to erect. The tank was propelled in the water by its tracks at a speed of 6 km/hour. When swimming, the driver stood on the rear of the hull, using a remote throttle control and reins attached to the tiller.

Strv 103C

In late 1983, Bofors was awarded a contract to rebuild Strv 103B tanks to the new Strv 103C standard. The improved vehicles were delivered between 1986 and 1989. The Strv 103C introduced several improvements. The multi-fuel engine was replaced with a diesel engine, and an improved transmission was fitted. A laser rangefinder was incorporated into the gunner’s sight (but not the commander’s), along with a fire-control computer. A pair of Bofors Lyran illumination launchers were fitted to the roof to illuminate targets at night. In time of war, 18 fuel cans would be fitted to the sides of the vehicle, providing a degree of spaced armour as well as an extra 396 litres of fuel.

Mine Rollers

In the 1980s, the Swedish army started development of mine rollers. Production began in 1987, with delivery in 1989. The system used two sets of three heavy steel discs, suspended from a coupling. Couplings were produced for Centurion and Strv 103 tanks. The rollers would detonate pressure-activated mines, while a chain between the rollers would detonate tilt-rod detonated mines. Each set of rollers could detonate 15 to 20 mines before needing to be replaced.

Strv 103C with mine rollers (Försvarsmuseum Boden, via Wikimedia Commons [CC BY-SA])

The rollers weighed six tonnes, and the coupling an extra tonne. Rollers and couplings were transported in sections, on lorries fitted with cranes. It would take a tank crew 30 to 40 minutes to fit the rollers, and mine clearing could begin immediately. The tank would travel at 8 to 15 km/hour during clearing, and could go as fast as 25 km/hour for short distances.

Normal removal took 20 minutes, but in an emergency a set of explosive spring bolts could be fired, removing the rollers in five seconds.

Organisation

Strv 103s were deployed in armoured battalions. Each battalion would have two tank companies, plus HQ company, pioneer company, artillery company and two mechanised infantry companies. Each tank company had four platoons, each of three tanks, and a mechanised infantry platoon. The infantry platoon had three rifle squads, each consisting of seven men carried in a Pbv 302. An armoured battalion would have two such tank companies

Specifications: Strv 103B (Strv 103C in brackets)

Crew: 3

Combat weight: 39.7 tonnes (42.5 tonnes)

Length (including gun): 8.99m

Width (overall): 3.63m

Height: 2.14m (including commander’s MG): 2.43m

Ground clearance: 0.4m

Max road speed: 50 km/hour

Fuel capacity: 960 litres

Max road range: 390km

Gradient: 60%

Vertical obstacle: 0.9m

Trench: 2.3m

Armament

1x 105mm L74 gun (50 rounds)

2x 7.62mm Ksp 58 MG

1x 7.62mm Ksp 58 AA MG

Artillery of the Warsaw Pact now available

I’m happy to announce that Artillery of the Warsaw Pact, the third book in my Weapons and Equipment of the Warsaw Pact series, has been released.

Artillery of the Warsaw Pact provides a compelling and detailed account of the artillery used by Warsaw Pact countries and the important role it played during this period of suspicion, tension and unease. The powerful weapons created at this time had the potential to destroy significant enemy resources, posing a very real threat to NATO forces.

Buy the ebook or paperback now.

Czech vzor 77 Dana SP Gun-Howitzer

In the late 1970s, Czechoslovakia began development of a wheeled 152mm self-propelled gun-howitzer. The result was the vzor 77 Dana, which entered service with the Czech army in 1981. It had an eight-wheeled chassis based on components of the Tatra 813 8×8 lorry, rather than the more usual tracked chassis. The Tatra 813 had been shown to have a good cross-country capability, but its wheeled chassis was much cheaper and easier to maintain than a comparable tracked system. Since the Dana operated some distance behind the lines, tactical mobility was less important than on front-line vehicles.

Czech vzor 77 Dana (Joint Multinational Training Command Public Affairs Office from Grafenwoehr, Germany [CC-BY])

The driver sat in the front compartment on the left, with the commander to his right. A large, fully enclosed turret was in the centre, with the engine at the rear. Armour was sufficient to provide protection against small arms and shell splinters. The vehicle had a central tyre pressure regulation system and power steering.

The driver and commander had roof hatches and windscreens with armoured shutters. Each also had two firing ports, one to the front and one to the side. The commander operated the communication system and was provided with a night sight. The driver operated the turret locking system and stabilisers.

Armament

The 152mm gun-howitzer was fitted with a muzzle brake, and could fire the same ammunition as the Soviet 2S3 Akatsiya, as well as Czech-made ammunition. The vehicle had a fully automatic loading system, which loaded the projectile and the separate charge, and could operate at all elevations. Single shot or fully automatic fire modes could be selected by the gunner.

Polish vzor 77 Dana (Ministerstwo Obrony Narodowej)

The Dana took two minutes to prepare for firing after coming to a halt, and required one minute to prepare to move off after the last round had been fired. Hydraulic jacks were lowered before firing to ensure a stable platform. Sights were provided for direct fire as well as indirect fire. Up to 60 rounds of ammunition could be carried, but road speed was reduced if more than 40 rounds were carried.

The turret was made up of two distinct parts, with the weapon mounted externally between them, ensuring that no fumes could enter the interior. The turret could only rotate through 225º. Each side of the turret had access doors, roof hatches, and vision devices. The gunner and loader operator were in the left half of the turret, with the ammunition handler, who set the fuses, in the right half.

A 12.7mm anti-aircraft machine gun was fitted to the turret roof on the right side, and could also be used in the direct fire role. An NBC system was fitted as standard.

Specifications: vzor 77 Dana

Crew: 5

Combat weight: 29.25 tonnes

Length: 11.16m

Width: 3m

Height: 2.85m

Ground clearance: 0.41m

Maximum road speed: 80km/h

Maximum road range: 740km

Gradient: 60%

Vertical obstacle: 0.6m

Trench: 2m

Armament

1x 152mm gun-howitzer (40 rounds, or 60 rounds with speed reduced to 70km/h)

1x 12.7mm NSV MG

FV4401 Contentious: Britain’s S-Tank?

In the 1950s, the British army investigated the possibility of a main battle tank weighing around 20-30 tons. Named the FV4401 Contentious, it was part of Project Prodigal, which eventually led to the highly successful CVR(T) range, some of which are still in service today.

FV4401 Contentious at Bovington Tank Museum

Contentious was envisioned as a small tank, but with armour protection and firepower comparable to contemporary main battle tanks. It would have a crew of two, and both wheeled and tracked chassis were considered. A 20 ton vehicle could be air-dropped from a Beverley transport aircraft. At the higher end of the weight range, it could have a fully-enclosed crew compartment with overhead armour and NBC protection.

Armour

Contentious had a number of innovative features, and armour was one such area. The glacis plate was to have horizontal ribs, which would break up kinetic energy rounds and provide a high degree of protection against HESH. Behind this plate was a gap of four feet, which was to be filled with fuel. Every 3″ of fuel provided protection equivalent to 1″ of armour, so the fuel tank added protection equivalent to a 16″ thick armour plate. The back plate, behind the fuel tank, was 40mm thick. This arrangement was found to be invulnerable to Conqueror’s 120mm gun at point blank range, and all known anti-tank guided missiles. Side skirts were also to be fitted, and internal linings would protect the crew from nuclear radiation and back-spall armour fragments.

Contentious armour diagrams (The National Archives: WO 194/1351)

At first glance, using fuel as armour would seem to be nonsensical. However, tests carried out showed that this presented little extra risk, especially when using diesel fuel. If the fuel tank was penetrated, fuel would obviously leak. This presented the risk of an external fire, and was more likely when the ambient temperature was higher. None of the tests led to an external fire with diesel, although it was likely in tropical environments. If an external fire was started, leaking fuel would keep it going. Such an external fire, however, presented little risk to the crew of the vehicle. If the fuel tank was partly empty and fuel vapour was present, there was a risk of explosion within the fuel tank. Such an explosion could be contained with even 5/16″ mild steel plate, so an armoured fuel tank, such as was planned for Contentious, would easily contain the explosion. A greater concern was the loss of fuel, and so the fuel tank was to be compartmentalised to minimise fuel loss.

Armament

Although a missile-based armament was considered, it was decided that a gun would be preferable. APDS offered a high hit rate at ranges out to 2,000 yards, along with a short time to firing the first round and a fast rate of fire. A missile was considered to offer a slight advantage in lethality, but this did not outweigh the advantages of a gun, which also offered better reliability. The possibility of adding a 76mm non-recoiling gun was mooted. This would have been rigidly fixed to the main armament, and used for HE.

In order to keep height and weight down, Contentious aimed its main armament by turning the vehicle and tilting the suspension. This was similar to the Swedish Strv 103, but unlike the Swedish vehicle, Contentious would have limited traverse. The trial vehicle, which can be seen at Bovington tank museum, bears some similarity to the Swedish vehicle.

Contentious would have a crew of two, who would sit side by side. An automatic loading system was to be fitted, so the crew would consist of commander and driver/gunner. A ranging machine gun was considered, but in the end, it was decided to use a laser range finder, which was expected to have an effective range of around 2,000 yards. This would be connected to a servo to allow automatic adjustment of gun elevation. The system would reduce the time to aim and fire the first round from 8-10 seconds down to just two seconds. At least twelve targets, at random ranges of up to 2,000 yards, could be hit within 60 seconds.

Each crew member would have a full set of driving and gunnery controls, so the commander could fire if required. The envisioned procedure was that the commander would find a target, turn the vehicle roughly to bear, then stop the vehicle. The gunner would then aim the gun and fire. The expectation was that this would not take significantly longer than with a turreted tank, but with the advantage that the frontal armour would always face the target.

FV4401 Contentious at Bovington Tank Museum
Mobility

As well as tracks, a wheeled chassis was considered. This was to have six driven wheels, and was expected to have a range of over 1,000 miles, compared to around 500 miles for the tracked chassis. The wheels were to be five feet in diameter, with non-pneumatic tyres to reduce vulnerability. They were to have retractable spuds for greater traction on soft ground. The engine requirement was for a multi-fuel engine of 350-500bhp. In the late 1950s there was no such engine available, and the plan was to develop one based on contemporary main battle tank engines.

The possibility of air-dropping the vehicle was an important consideration, as it was felt such a capability would greatly increase their usefulness. Initial trials based on a 20 ton replica vehicle were carried out with Beverley aircraft in November 1956. To minimise weight, a separate platform was not used – air bags and skid boards were attached directly to the vehicle hull. These initial trials showed promise, and so a full research project began in July 1957, to develop a method of dropping tracked vehicles weighing up to 20 tons. By November 1959, they had shown that it was feasible to drop vehicles of up to 17.5 tons, and progress was being made towards the eventual target of 20 tons.

Conclusion

Contentious had some physical similarities to the Swedish Strv 103 “S-Tank”, but unlike the Swedish vehicle, it was not intended to replace conventional main battle tanks on the front line. The 20 ton, air-droppable version would probably have been used for rapid deployment scenarios, especially where main battle tanks would be encountered in the enemy forces. Indeed, a presentation to the US Army mentioned that it offered “the unusual possibility of an armoured fighting force which can rapidly be assembled at any global point”.

The post FV4401 Contentious: Britain’s S-Tank? appeared first on Russell Phillips.

Rivets of the Warsaw Pact

I’m pleased to announce the latest in my Weapons and Equipment of the Warsaw Pact series – Rivets of the Warsaw Pact.

A must-read for all rivet counters, it’s available as a free PDF for a limited time.

Download the PDF.

The post Rivets of the Warsaw Pact appeared first on Russell Phillips.

Contact Options

Currently, the only way I can tell people about new books, blog posts, discounts, etc is by email. I keep hearing that people don’t use email very much these days, so I’m looking at other ways to keep in touch. I’m not going to stop using email, but I might start using other options as well.

If you’d like me to use instant messenger or a similar service to tell you about new books, blog posts, discounts, etc, please let me know. Once I know what people prefer, I’ll look into setting something up.

The post Contact Options originally appeared on Russell Phillips.

Soviet Military Innovation in the Cold War

During the Cold War, there was a tendency in the West to believe that the Soviet system, and in particular the Soviet army, could not innovate. It was sometimes assumed that innovation was the sole preserve of the West, and that Soviet designers merely copied Western inventions.

BMD-2 airborne combat vehicle. [Vitaly V. Kuzmin (CC-BY-SA 4.0 International)]

This article will outline some Soviet military innovations developed during the Cold War. It is my intention to show that Soviet military designers could, and did, produce innovative systems. Some were very effective, and later adopted by other armies, including those in the West. As is to be expected when dealing with radically new ideas, some did not live up to expectations.

Foreign Inventions

Soviet military thinkers didn’t only adopt domestic innovations, they also adopted ideas from other countries. Assault rifles and infantry fighting vehicles were two examples of this. Both were German inventions, and both were adopted by the Soviet and other Warsaw Pact armies. The West Germans were the first to adopt the infantry fighting vehicle concept, but the rest of NATO didn’t catch up for some years. The Soviets not only adopted the concept, they also expanded on it, to create the BMD airborne combat vehicle. This could be dropped by parachute to provide airborne units with much-needed mobility and firepower.

AK-47. An iconic design, based on a German idea.

The Germans used assault rifles during World War II, and the AK-47 entered service with the Soviet army in 1949. NATO, on the other hand, didn’t start introducing assault rifles until at least the 1960s. Many NATO armies didn’t do so until after the 5.56mm round was standardised with the adoption of STANAG 4172 in 1980.

BMP Armament

Although the BMP wasn’t the first infantry fighting vehicle, it did have some innovative features. It was the first to add an anti-tank guided missile launcher. This marked a significant increase in firepower over the autocannon-only armament of the German Schützenpanzer Lang HS.30, and was widely adopted by other armies on later vehicles.

The BMP’s 73mm gun was another interesting feature. In order to fit a large calibre gun in a small turret, Soviet designers developed a low pressure gun, the 2A28 Grom. Based on the SPG-9 recoilless gun, it had a short recoil and fired the same projectiles as the SPG-9. The relatively large calibre of the gun meant that the HEAT warhead could penetrate the frontal armour of contemporary NATO main battle tanks, something that would not have been possible with an autocannon.

Smoothbore Guns and APFSDS

The T-12 anti-tank gun, which entered service in 1961, was a smoothbore weapon that fired fin-stabilised ammunition (APFSDS). This new ammunition was much longer and thinner than traditional spin-stabilised AP or APDS ammunition, giving it greater penetration.

125mm APFSDS round

The T-62 subsequently became the first tank to be fitted with a smoothbore gun, the 115mm 2A20. Every subsequent Soviet main battle tank was fitted with a smoothbore gun in preference to a rifled weapon. Many other nations also adopted smoothbore guns firing fin-stabilised ammunition for their tanks.

Vasilek Automatic Mortar

The 2B9 Vasilek was an 82mm calibre mortar. Although it could be muzzle-loaded like a traditional mortar, it was normally breech-loaded using a clip containing four rounds. These four rounds could be fired in two seconds. These rapid bursts of fire meant a greater quantity of explosive landing on the target in a shorter time, increasing the shock effect on the target.

82mm 2B9 Vasilyek automatic mortar

The concept of an automatic mortar has not been widely adopted elsewhere. The Soviet army evidently considered the Vasilek to be a success, taking an improved version, the 2B9M, into service in 1983. This version is still in service with the Russian army.

PMP Pontoon Bridge

Soviet military innovation wasn’t confined to weapon systems. In 1962, the PMP pontoon bridge was introduced, which incorporated a number of improvements over existing designs, both Soviet and NATO. Each pontoon had an integrated roadway, and was made up of four sections, which were folded in an accordion style for transit. This efficient use of space allowed each pontoon to be longer than previous designs, and so fewer pontoons were required for a full bridge.

Pontoons were launched by simply removing travel locks and reversing the lorry to the river edge, allowing momentum to carry the pontoon onto the water. The pontoon started to unfold automatically as it landed in the water. It would then be fully unfolded, locked and moved into place in the water.

PMP pontoon bridge in Vietnam

The combination of features meant that a full 227m long, 60 tonne capacity bridge could be completed in under an hour, two to three times faster than the earlier TPP. The Polish army built on the PMP design, creating the PP-64. This had a lower load capacity, but could be assembled more quickly. The US army also adopted the PMP’s design ideas in their successful Ribbon Bridge design.

Armoured Bridge Layers

Staying with bridging systems, the Soviet Union introduced the MTU-20 in 1967. This mounted a folding bridge on a T-55 tank chassis. Unusually, it was not a scissor bridge — it did not fold in the middle. Scissor bridges would be raised to the vertical, then unfolded over the gap to be bridged. This meant that they had a very high silhouetted during launching and recovery.

MTU-72 [Vitaly V. Kuzmin (CC-BY-SA 4.0 International)]

The MTU-20’s bridge folded at each end instead of in the middle. To launch, the ends of the bridge were unfolded, then the whole bridge was rolled forward. This was slower than the scissor bridge technique, but resulted in a much lower silhouette during launching and recovery operations. The Soviet army obviously decided that the longer launch time was acceptable, as the later MTU-72 used the same type of bridge.

Final Notes

This article concentrated on the Soviet army, but innovation was by no means limited to the army. For instance, the Soviet navy was an early adopter of hovercraft for landing naval infantry. The Kiev and Admiral Kuznetsov class aircraft carriers were very different to Western designs, featuring heavy anti-ship and anti-aircraft armaments in addition to aircraft. They also developed ground-effect vehicles for use as high-speed transport and missile craft.

The post Soviet Military Innovation in the Cold War originally appeared on Russell Phillips.